New Conference re-alignment thread

[Saulbadguy]

The old one has AIDS.

Anyways, Chip Brown from Orangebloods.com reports OU may apply to the Pac-12 by the end of the month.

Oklahoma will apply for membership to the Pac-12 before the end of the month, and Oklahoma State is expected to follow suit, a source close to OU's administration told Orangebloods.com.

Even though Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said Friday the Pac-12 was not interested in expansion at this time, OU's board of regents is fed up with the instability in the Big 12, the source said.

The OU board of regents will meet within two weeks to formalize plans to apply for membership to the Pac-12, the source said.

Messages left Sunday night with OU athletic director Joe Castiglione and Oklahoma State athletic director Mike Holder were not immediately returned.

If OU follows through with what appears to be a unanimous sentiment on the seven-member Oklahoma board of regents to leave the Big 12, realignment in college athletics could be heating back up. OU's application would be matched by an application from Oklahoma State, the source said, even though OSU president Burns Hargis and mega-booster Boone Pickens both voiced their support for the Big 12 last Thursday.

There is differing sentiment about if the Pac-12 presidents and chancellors are ready to expand again after bringing in Colorado and Utah last year and landing $3 billion TV contracts from Fox and ESPN. Colorado president Bruce Benson told reporters last week CU would be opposed to any expansion that might bring about east and west divisions in the Pac-12.

Currently, there are north and south divisions in the Pac-12. If OU and OSU were to join, Larry Scott would have to get creative.

Scott's orginal plan last summer was to bring in Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma and Oklahoma State and put them in an eastern division with Arizona and Arizona State. The old Pac-8 schools (USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington and Washington State) were to be in the west division.

Colorado made the move in June 2010, but when Texas A&M was not on board to go west, the Big 12 came back together with the help of its television partners (ABC/ESPN and Fox).

If Oklahoma and Oklahoma State were accepted into the Pac-12, there would undoubtedly be a hope by Larry Scott that Texas would join the league. But Texas sources have indicated UT is determined to hang onto the Longhorn Network, which would not be permissible in the Pac-12 in its current form.

Texas sources continue to indicate to Orangebloods.com that if the Big 12 falls apart, the Longhorns would consider "all options."

Big 12 commissioner Dan Beebe held an emergency conference call 10 days ago with league presidents excluding Oklahoma, Texas and Texas A&M and asked the other league presidents to "work on Texas" because Beebe didn't think the Pac-12 would take Oklahoma without Texas.

Now, it appears OU is willing to take its chances with the Pac-12 with or without Texas.

There seemed to be a temporary pause in any possible shifting of the college athletics' landscape when Baylor led a charge to tie up Texas A&M's move to the Southeastern Conference in legal red tape. BU refused to waive its right to sue the SEC over A&M's departure from the Big 12, and the SEC said it would not admit Texas A&M until it had been cleared of any potential lawsuits.

Baylor, Kansas and Iowa State have indicated they will not waive their right to sue the SEC.

It's unclear if an application by OU to the Pac-12 would draw the same threats of litigation against the Pac-12 from those Big 12 schools.

Stay tuned.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

BC would technically be a city school, but there's the fact that no - they haven't had much in the way of sustained success throughout their program's history.

BC is probably the best city school available and yet they've pretty much been career also-rans. They've had a few nice years in the last 5 or so, but just watch - they're in their 'up' cycle and they'll be back down in short order.

BC is the 'exception' that proves the rule. They're the best that the city schools have to offer and yet they're still a pretty mediocre program.

Pitt is better than BC I would think.

They are def a city school with success.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

TCU > West Virginia > Kansas State

WVU has better recruiting and TV viewership than TCU. So, again, how is TCU > WVU?

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by Wickedson

Gonna toss Boston College in there too, why not.

They are a city school, but I'm not sure that they help your argument.

[ChiefsCountry]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

City Schools tend to be pretty lousy with a few spurts of decent play in between, especially in football. They simply can't come up with the resources to run with the big dogs with any regularity.

Louisville has a larger athletic budget than Mizzou does.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by eazyb81

Really? Mizzou's 6 million residents and two top 30 metro cities are not a big deal in TV contract negotiations? Losing the second most popular school in Texas, which features 25 million residents, is not a big deal?

You should stick to starting Royals threads.

Texas A&M is not even close to driving the bus in Texas. MU and TA&M are replaceable, in terms of not impacting the contract. People around the country are curious about OU and UT games. Hardly anyone outside the Midwest cares about Mizzou, and Kansas City is a KU town.

[KChiefs1]

TCU isn't a better option than WVU?

Travel expenses?
Recruiting area?
TV?

Locking up the Dallas/Ft Worth area compared to West Virginia?

What am I missing?????

[|Zach|]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Texas A&M is not even close to driving the bus in Texas. MU and TA&M are replaceable, in terms of not impacting the contract. People around the country are curious about OU and UT games. Hardly anyone outside the Midwest cares about Mizzou, and Kansas City is a KU town.

Who exactly...apples to apples will the B12 easily replace if Missouri where to leave.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by alnorth

They are a city school, but I'm not sure that they help your argument.

Point is that Louisville is very qualified to be in this conference and if were up to me they'd be one of the top schools targeted in order for the conference to get back to 10.

They have more accomplishments on the field than many of the schools in this conference. Not sure why being located in a city should be a deterrent.

[Bambi]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Who exactly...apples to apples will the B12 easily replace if Missouri where to leave.

Louisville, BYU, TCU, etc etc

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by |Zach|

Who exactly...apples to apples will the B12 easily replace if Missouri where to leave.

My argument is that Texas and OU account for well over 80% of the reason why the Big 12 can command huge contracts. Perhaps even over 90%.

To the extent that losing Mizzou or TA&M hurts at all, they are mostly replaceable (especially with BYU, which has a national following) for an almost-irrelevant slice.

[DaKCMan AP]

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

TCU isn't a better option than WVU?

Travel expenses?
Recruiting area?
TV?

Locking up the Dallas/Ft Worth area compared to West Virginia?

What am I missing?????

You're missing that WVU gets better recruiting classes and has close to 3 times as much viewership as TCU.

[KChiefs1]

Originally Posted by alnorth

Texas A&M is not even close to driving the bus in Texas. MU and TA&M are replaceable, in terms of not impacting the contract. People around the country are curious about OU and UT games. Hardly anyone outside the Midwest cares about Mizzou, and Kansas City is a KU town.

Exactly why MU should go to the SEC.

[Saul Good]

1. Boston College doesn't have a history of sustained achievement in football.

2. They are a private Jesuit school.

3. The best examples of successful city schools are all in the Big East. They are only successful at all because they play each other.

[Pitt Gorilla]

Originally Posted by alnorth

My argument is that Texas and OU account for well over 80% of the reason why the Big 12 can command huge contracts. Perhaps even over 90%.

To the extent that losing Mizzou or TA&M hurts at all, they are mostly replaceable (especially with BYU, which has a national following) for an almost-irrelevant slice.

If true, that clears the legal obstacles to joining the SEC.

[alnorth]

Originally Posted by KChiefs1

Exactly why MU should go to the SEC.

where they will be about as relevant as Arkansas.